True Interpretation of the 2nd Amendment

[Auld Phart]

Due Process does not cover anything specifically named in the US Constitution. State laws and constitutions cannot, despite your claims, overrule the US Constitution.

dude; nobody on the left takes the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Quoting the US Constitution to show that states and state constitutions can overrule the US Constitution? lol That is a special kind of pleading to ignorance.

But it is funny that you accept the US Constitution to be the law of the land when you want it to be.

Yes, there is a requirement for due process when you are accused of a crime. And if you are convicted of a felony or of domestic abuse, your right to keep & bear arms is lost. But there is no due process which removes the right to keep and bear arms for the population as a whole. No state court or state constitution can remove that right from the population as a whole.

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

 

[WinterBorn]

No, that is looking at the context in which the 2nd was written.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

And so the "people's" right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Except for a few public officials.

this is why i don't take the right wing seriously about Constitutional law. the People are the militia. well regulated militia of the People, are declared Necessary.

And if you look at the militia of the time the US Constitution's writing, they were citizens who were called to arms when needed.

like i said; Nobody on the left should take the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.
10USC246 is also, federal law, right wingers. Don't be illegal to federal law.

When was 10USC246 written?

 

[WinterBorn]

Due Process does not cover anything specifically named in the US Constitution. State laws and constitutions cannot, despite your claims, overrule the US Constitution.

dude; nobody on the left takes the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Quoting the US Constitution to show that states and state constitutions can overrule the US Constitution? lol That is a special kind of pleading to ignorance.

But it is funny that you accept the US Constitution to be the law of the land when you want it to be.

Yes, there is a requirement for due process when you are accused of a crime. And if you are convicted of a felony or of domestic abuse, your right to keep & bear arms is lost. But there is no due process which removes the right to keep and bear arms for the population as a whole. No state court or state constitution can remove that right from the population as a whole.

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

 

[danielpalos]

dude; nobody on the left takes the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.

Quoting the US Constitution to show that states and state constitutions can overrule the US Constitution? lol That is a special kind of pleading to ignorance.

But it is funny that you accept the US Constitution to be the law of the land when you want it to be.

Yes, there is a requirement for due process when you are accused of a crime. And if you are convicted of a felony or of domestic abuse, your right to keep & bear arms is lost. But there is no due process which removes the right to keep and bear arms for the population as a whole. No state court or state constitution can remove that right from the population as a whole.

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

 

[danielpalos]

dude; nobody on the left takes the right wing seriously about the law, Constitutional or otherwise.

Quoting the US Constitution to show that states and state constitutions can overrule the US Constitution? lol That is a special kind of pleading to ignorance.

But it is funny that you accept the US Constitution to be the law of the land when you want it to be.

Yes, there is a requirement for due process when you are accused of a crime. And if you are convicted of a felony or of domestic abuse, your right to keep & bear arms is lost. But there is no due process which removes the right to keep and bear arms for the population as a whole. No state court or state constitution can remove that right from the population as a whole.

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

 

[Auld Phart]

Quoting the US Constitution to show that states and state constitutions can overrule the US Constitution? lol That is a special kind of pleading to ignorance.

But it is funny that you accept the US Constitution to be the law of the land when you want it to be.

Yes, there is a requirement for due process when you are accused of a crime. And if you are convicted of a felony or of domestic abuse, your right to keep & bear arms is lost. But there is no due process which removes the right to keep and bear arms for the population as a whole. No state court or state constitution can remove that right from the population as a whole.

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

 

[danielpalos]

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

 

[Auld Phart]

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

 

[Auld Phart]

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

 

[danielpalos]

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

 

[Auld Phart]

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

I don't.

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

 

[danielpalos]

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

I don't.

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

 

[Auld Phart]

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

I don't.

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

 

[WinterBorn]

Quoting the US Constitution to show that states and state constitutions can overrule the US Constitution? lol That is a special kind of pleading to ignorance.

But it is funny that you accept the US Constitution to be the law of the land when you want it to be.

Yes, there is a requirement for due process when you are accused of a crime. And if you are convicted of a felony or of domestic abuse, your right to keep & bear arms is lost. But there is no due process which removes the right to keep and bear arms for the population as a whole. No state court or state constitution can remove that right from the population as a whole.

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

 

[WinterBorn]

It also says the right of the people.

(not just the militia)

"when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union."

where do you get all these extra words from?

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

I asked days ago for you to post any evidence that the 2nd amendment is a collective right. Not surprisingly, you have not.

 

[danielpalos]

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

I don't.

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim, or it is just another right wing appeal to ignorance, like usual.

 

[Auld Phart]

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

I asked days ago for you to post any evidence that the 2nd amendment is a collective right. Not surprisingly, you have not.

Face it, WB, dan is a troll.

no sense feeding his ego more than we already have.

 

[danielpalos]

Due Process is what our federal Constitution covers.

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

 

[danielpalos]

Only if you appeal to ignorance of this ratified legal fact, under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

I asked days ago for you to post any evidence that the 2nd amendment is a collective right. Not surprisingly, you have not.

dude; what do You specifically believe we have been arguing these past several pages?

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

look in any dictionary.